Little-endian convention, and saving to a binary file - c

Question

I have a matrix (2-D int pointer int **mat) that I am trying to write to a file in Linux in Little-endian convention.
Here is my function that writes to the file:
#define BUFF_SIZE 4
void write_matrix(int **mat, int n, char *dest_file) {
int i, j;
char buff[BUFF_SIZE];
int fd = open(dest_file, O_CREAT | O_WRONLY, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IXUSR);
if (fd < 0) {
printf("Error: Could not open the file \"%s\".\n", dest_file);
}
buff[0] = (n & 0x000000ff);
buff[1] = (n & 0x0000ff00) >> 8;
buff[2] = (n & 0x00ff0000) >> 16;
buff[3] = (n & 0xff000000) >> 24;
write(fd, buff, BUFF_SIZE);
for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
for (j = 0; j < n; j++) {
buff[0] = (mat[i][j] & 0x000000ff);
buff[1] = (mat[i][j] & 0x0000ff00) >> 8;
buff[2] = (mat[i][j] & 0x00ff0000) >> 16;
buff[3] = (mat[i][j] & 0xff000000) >> 24;
if (write(fd, buff, BUFF_SIZE) != BUFF_SIZE) {
close(fd);
printf("Error: could not write to file.\n");
return;
}
}
}
close(fd);
}
The problem is that when I write out a matrix large enough of the form mat[i][i] = i (let's say 512 X 512), I think I get an overflow, since I get weird negative numbers.
To convert back I use:
void read_matrix(int fd, int **mat, int n, char buff[]) {
int i, j;
for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
for (j = 0; j < n; j++) {
assert(read(fd, buff, BUFF_SIZE) == BUFF_SIZE);
mat[i][j] = byteToInt(buff);
}
}
}
int byteToInt(char buff[]) {
return (buff[3] << 24) | (buff[2] << 16) | (buff[1] << 8) | (buff[0]);
}
What an I doing wrong?
EDITED:
Added the read_matrix function.
It seems like I'm getting a short instead on an int, since 384 = (110000000) becomes -128 = (bin) 1000000
Did a test, and found out that:
char c = 128;
int i = 0;
i |= c;
gives i = -128. Why????

Answer 1

The problem is in your input conversion:
int byteToInt(char buff[]) {
return (buff[3] << 24) | (buff[2] << 16) | (buff[1] << 8) | (buff[0]);
}
You don't mention which platform you are on, but on most common platforms char is signed. And that will cause problems. Suppose, for example, that buff[1] is 0x80 (0b1000000). Since it is a signed value, that is the code for the value -128. And since shift operators start by doing integer promotions on both of their arguments, that will be converted to the integer -128 before the shift operation is performed; in other words, it will have the value 0xFFFFFF80, which will become 0xFFFF8000 after the shift.
The bitwise logical operators (such as |) perform the usual arithmetic conversions before doing the bitwise operations; in the case of (buff[1] << 8) | (buff[0]), the left-hand operator will already be a signed int (because the type of << is the type of its promoted left-hand argument); the right-hand argument, an implicitly signed char, will also be promoted to a signed int, so again if it were 0x80, it would end up being sign-extended to 0xFFFFFF80.
In either case, the bitwise-or operation will end up with unwanted high-order 1 bits.
Explicitly casting buff[x] to an unsigned int won't help, because it will first be sign-extended to an int before being reinterpreted as an unsigned int. Instead, it is necessary to cast it to an unsigned char:
int byteToInt(char buff[]) {
return ((unsigned char)buff[3] << 24)
| ((unsigned char)buff[2] << 16)
| ((unsigned char)buff[1] << 8)
| (unsigned char)buff[0];
}
Since int may be 16-bit, it would be better to use long, and indeed it would be better to use unsigned long to avoid other conversion issues. That means doing a double cast:
unsigned long byteToInt(char buff[]) {
return ((unsigned long)(unsigned char)buff[3] << 24)
| ((unsigned long)(unsigned char)buff[2] << 16)
| ((unsigned long)(unsigned char)buff[1] << 8)
| (unsigned long)(unsigned char)buff[0];
}

Answer 2

What you have is an undefined behaviour often overlooked. Left shifting of signed negative values is undefined. See here for details.
When you do this
int byteToInt(char buff[]) {
return (buff[3] << 24) | (buff[2] << 16) | (buff[1] << 8) | (buff[0]);
}
even if one element of buff has a negative value (I.e. one of the binary data's value sets the MSB) then you hit undefined behaviour. Since your data is binary, reading it as unsigned makes the most sense. You could use a standard type which makes the signedness and length explicit, such as uint8_t from stdint.h.